Friday, January 9, 2009

This will be a shorter note, because I ain't got my coffee yet. But
let me note one thing about our daily conversations: They are not
science. A lot of people confront their normal conversation with the
conversations they are doing then they are working or do precious
stuff. Let me give you one example: In a scientific conversation --
may it be a thesis, or a presentation or even a talk, you have a clear
distinctions between the words. Everything is bound to be defined and
there shouldn't be any double meaning. This is why we have to write
down so many stuff to make things clear, have to build upon a great
fundament that is safe. Safe to talk about the things in the right
way.
But then there is the normal conversation, the real jazz. A
meta-language of its like. I don't bother to define everything right.
In fact it's just talking. Isn't it sometimes we are thinking about
the map of words like, you got me a map. With clear borders and
nothing is something like a doubled thing, meaning something else. I
think it is all about our more and more complex life leading to
expertise in many areas where we are not, well experts.
The enlightenment, or the thought of the enlightenment brought us to a
thought most liberals and capitalists advocate nowadays: The thought
that the individual knows best what's right in exactly this
situation. This thought is just plain wrong. It is not. Because
there are many situations where you can't be an expert at. So
democracy is bound to fail?
Well no. Not exactly. I don't think that the double meanings get in
our ways all of the times. Actually it's very handy not to define
every meaning every time. Most of the time we just get the point.
Our intuition leads the way to understand each other.
And democracy at its roots, well is something about the individual
thought. But all the leafs are just plain syndicated thoughts. We
have a discussion and there the definitions come out of the stone
carving itself into our mind and we can make an informed decision.
So if you are "correcting" your friend about the right meaning, well
it is wrong if you are not having a scientific talk or something. In
day to day life the source of scientific knowledge things are
changing. And if a word changes its meaning, well than you can inform
yourself about the difference. Your thought is important, too. But I
personally don't use omnibus for the bus. And bus is just plain
wrong. We are just exchanging messages in our conversations. There
is no rule of the imperative.
And then there are syntax and semantics. Everything you do has a
syntax. Everything you intended is just semantics. The black jeans,
the red dress, there is always an intention, you can just
communicate. If you use words in a certain way, you tell me something
about yourself. And this is what all this correction is about. You
are talking at another level the meta-level to identify yourself as
one of the creatures -- the writers of our language. Or if you
correct because of the origin you are a preserver. It is all about
your role in society and not the imperative of some theory. If at all
there is no theory for the jazz, because then it wouldn't be the
jazz.
O. K., I go and crap my coffee.